Torment blade question

Since Our attacks are amgical as it is, if a KoS or Slanneshi herald gets the torment blade, do they get an extra attack?

Yes they get 1 extra attack with the Torment Blade.



GoC

Seconded. Dont think of gifts as magic items and just apply the rules as is (hand weapon+ in this case).

It won't work if you are mounted though.

Well i dont use mounted heralds and only put it on my Keeper, since he needs it more. Plus its so cheap.

So - this has been cleared up too ?

I remember arguing for this months and months ago - that it could add +1 to a model's attack if selected as "hand weapon" + "default Hand weapon that the Heralds or Greater Daemons have" = +1 Attack bonus, per the basic rule book.

But back then this was very contentious and debated back and forth by people as to which way to interpret it.

Are you guys saying (with such seeming certainty) that this is "how it's played" though - for sure - now, and the "Debate is Over" ?

If so - good news for Slaaneshi !

Almost certainly not. The argument that a Torment Blade = "an extra hand weapon" is very weak, but that's not the strongest reason. The strongest reason is not being a tool.

It's 5pts. Do you honestly think a 5pt gift is intended to give a special effect and an extra attack? Playing the strongest army book in the game is one thing, playing it and abusing poor wording to get an obviously unintended bonus is another. It's poor form and just not cricket. You know it shouldn't, you know the argument for it is weak, come on, be the bigger man about it.

Gyges I think you are understating the rule justification for torment blade and staff of change being additional hand weapons

http://z7.invisionfree.com/wyrmling_x/inde...?showtopic=5439

See this thread for the discussion - after reading through it you can certainly still argue it's beardy - but are you saying dark elf beast masters and black orcs don't get a bonus attack for using a second weapon (choppa/beastmasters scourge)

Though really in the context of a slaanesh herald/KoS/lord of change - the extra attack from one of these gifts is probably a lot less beardy than lots of other combos that are available

I suspect you mean *not* understanding.

Here's what I make of the various arguments.

It says "Hand Weapon", lots of stuff doesn't, surely that has to mean something".

This is a pretty good RAW argument, we should try to always assume all the rules text means something and none of it is redundant. Good general principle. The trouble is that GW isn't terribly consistent with how it uses language and that makes it difficult to take RAW arguments too seriously in general.

In this specific case take a look at cases where something was intended to be two hand weapons.

The precedent isn't just saying "hand weapon" and assuming people will read that to mean +1A, there is even an effort taken to avoid the whole two hand weapon concept. Note that this weapon (+1A and a special effect) costs 65pts...

Again, doesn't use the kinda weird "hand weapon" phrasing, but also like the axes is totally clear on the effect. If we're going to take seriously the idea that GW chooses it's words carefully and that means Torment Blade (with a Hand Weapon reference) has to act differently than Firestorm Blade (without one), then we have to also account for the difference between when they say Hand Weapon and "two hand weapons". They know how to make it clear when you get +1A, they've done it before but they didn't do it here.

What about Black Orcs and Hydra Handlers?

The two hand weapons doesn't equal two hand weapons argument doesn't really strike me as correctly identifying the problem. A Black Orc fights with "two hand weapons" explicitly, he doesn't have a couple hand weapons listed from which we generalize that he has the additional hand weapon rule. The Hydra Handlers are (IMO) a much stronger example.

Part of the trouble with generalizing over to the Torment Blade is that it isn't clear what kind of thing it is. It isn't a magic item, the Armybook says so. Is it an item at all? Firestorm Blade isn't. If we take "Hand Weapon" to mean it is an item, is it an exception to "Gifts aren't magic items"? Are we supposed to believe it is a non-magic weapon that makes magic attacks and has a magic special effect? It's a weird mess whatever one says. If it is a magic weapon you don't get the +1A, if it isn't then is it an item at all? It it isn't, no +1A. If it isn't we have a weapon that makes magic attacks that isn't a magic weapon, and that seems wrong.

What about the cost?

This is the strongest argument IMO. No item in the game gives +1A for 5pts, let alone +1A and an (admittedly lame) special effect. The cardinal rule in interpreting what people say is trying to work out what they mean. If a man comes up to you on the street and says "Do you know what time it is?" a literal reading is as an inquiry about what you do and don't know. Say "Yes" and walk on. The correct interpretation of his sentence is "Please tell me what time it is". You have to rely on context and the likely meaning of a speaker's sentence to understand it.

Look at the context, look at the prices of other armies magic weapons. 5pts is way too few for +1A, but just about right for the lame special effect. Look at the likely meaning, no one argues that GW intended for Torment Blade to give +1A for 5pts. Look at Many Armed Monstrosity. No one thinks the first extra attack is worth 5pts and the second one is worth 45 more points.

Don't be a Richard.
This is the "don't be a ****" argument I mentioned earlier. You're playing the most powerful book in the game by a long way. Reaching for an obviously unintended benefit is just going to leave a bad taste in your opponent's mouth. Don't be that guy. Where there are ambiguities about what a rule does, the gentlemanly thing to do is use the interpretation that cuts against you.

Infantry Only
The two hand weapons rule specifies it only effects infantry. Keepers of Secrets are Monsters and Characters explicitly, which means they're not infantry. "But what about the Bone Giant?" you say? GW forgot. They just don't use language carefully enough to justify careful RAW readings. You've got to rely on RAI, which brings us right back to it only being 5pts and not being a ****.

I think understating is more polite than not understanding and I didn't want to make assumptions on what you had read.

Again though I think the 'gee that doesn't feel right' argument is the strongest counter to the RAW which I think is quite clear.

While I understand you are trying to differentiate this from some other magic weapons whose fluff and rules suggest they provide two hand weapons - that's required in those cases as you explicitly cannot use your given mundane hand weapon with a magic weapon. I actually think the RAW is quite different on axes of khorgor than it is on the wildfire blades - if an opposing model had a special rule 'does not get the benefits from having two weapons' the wildfire blade model would lose an attack but the axes would not. The Axes 'take two hands' and give +1 attack but actually do not count explicitly as using two hand weapons.

Unlike wildfire blades for example torment blade does not count as TWO hand weapons (via fluff or RAW) it's just . . . a hand weapon (where as the KoS already has one)

We both agree GW has been increasingly careful about the designation LANCE. SPEAR. in rules descriptions - because gifts aren't magic weapons they do not need the additional rules caveats in the wildfire blades.

Black orcs actually fight with two choppas - we are told seperately that a choppa counts as a hand weapon. We are not told that 2 choppas = a hand weapon + an "ADDITIONAL" hand weapon. (For the folks who feel that having 2 hand weapons is NOT the same as having a hand weapon + an ADDITIONAL hand weapon.)

Cost - I'll give you an example of item that gives +1 attack for about five points - a mundane additional hand weapon Though if that's the argument about torment blade is there any reason to think it applies to the much more expensive Staff of Change?

But seriously I'm not sure 50 points for +2 attacks is appropriate either - particularly on the quite crappy Herald of slaanesh or Daemon prince who takes it. I also think a jugger should be pointed much higher than it is (particularly for Skulltaker) The price tags on items in DoC are frankly all over the place with some things overpriced and many others under pricedfor their effectivieness. In the context of the models who can benefit from the +1 attack (herald of slaanesh, kipper,and LoC) I'd argue that +1 attack irrespective of price isn't going to make much difference in the game play of that model - and again is much LESS powerful than other gift combinations point for point available to the model (in the kippers case it essentially uses up 25 points of gift access as you can't fit anything else in) If your opponent is kitting up their LoC for combat - they are taking a significantly softer army than they could otherwise.

Monsters can't be infantry - exclude the bone giant - how about both the BoC and WoC Shaggoth? Two more books they forgot

Re Don't be a Richard -
I think the RAW is quite clear here -whether folks who haven't looked at it carefully understand it. Just because folks don't understand how the rules work doesn't mean you are being a jerk for playing with them- particularly as again you aren't getting much benefit compared to more powerful kitting options available to those models.

While I absolutely agree you should try to play in a way that provides an enjoyable game I think DoC's real challenges in providing an enjoyable game have NOTHING to do with these two gifts and lots to do with the far more heinous combinations of gifts/troops that we see.

If folks fielded more combat LoC/Kippers/slaanesh heralds INSTEAD of jugger heralds/nurgle heralds/ and casty types I think DoC would be (generally) more enjoyable to play against

I agree that two hand weapons equals "additional hand weapon", the Black Orcs more or less show that, but I think the Beastmasters really do even more clearly.

I agree that there is a good RAW argument that the Torment Blade is a hand weapon and the claws are too, then the Herald has two hand weapons. RAW only takes you so far though, especially with GW who don't know the difference between things like "reduce by 1" and "reduce by -1" for instance.

If the Torment Blade were a magic weapon it would be clear that it doesn't give +1A. A magic weapon must be used and must be used alone, and someone writing gift rules is likely to have had that in mind. Daemonic Gifts aren't magic weapons, so the RAW possibility of +1 attack crops up.

I feel like an oversight is a much more likely explanation than +1A for 5pts. If they intended it to act as an additional hand weapon there are *way* easier ways to say that. It beggers belief that if they meant to give +1A they wouldn't have said "acts as additional hand weapon" or say "+1 A" or something similar. "Hand Weapon" is just such a weird way to try to convey that idea that I can't believe that was the idea they intended to convey.

It's ambiguous enough that it feels like a stretch claiming the bonus. Stretching unclear rules to make Daemons even more powerful is what pushes it over the edge for me.

Ultimately the "right" answer is "there is disagreement, ask your tournament organizer for a ruling beforehand".

Agree absolutely on the last point

While I agree it's a strange choice of wording to get us to a specific ruling (I feel that way about way too many things in the DoC book) You have to admit - saying 'hand weapon' in the description was a deliberate and otherwise not required addition. It's actually fairly word economical - just leaves the rules step to the players.

Though I'd suggest again when folks say daemons are overpowered - they aren't talking about DoC players talking Lords of Change kitted out for combat- taking the hand weapon gifts for the kipper and LoC are essentially choosing to take a less powerful character choice than you otherwise could. For a slaanesh herald it's an upgrade - but still overall the least powerful herald choice you could pick from.

Not very many games are going to come down to whether a Herald has four attacks or five, but still, its just courteous to back off the questionable interpretations.

Umpteen pages of debate here or at the Warhammer Forum is one thing, but I'd really prefer to avoid it mid-game with a stranger.

At a tournament it's a good thing to have in the rules pack, in a lot of ways it doesn't matter as much which way it goes so long as there is a clear answer that everyone can be aware of going into the event.

Well said by both. It seems that it's "not" been cleared up then ? - LoL - I was hoping GW had addressed it in a FAQ or other semi-formal way in the months since I'd last haunted these forums.

As the G-Man pointed out though, if you take that setup for your Keeper - to get the "arguable" 7-attacks instead of 6 - - - you ARE potentially forming a weaker Keeper than you otherwise could have with those lost points - since most of the other gifts don't appropriately "fit" in the 100-pts limit for the Greater Daemons.


Also - he makes a good point on the Points Costs of things in the Daemon book being weirdly assigned.

While most of us - being logical peoples - assume that GW puts a detailed and time-consuming process into effect before it hands out Points costs in its Army Books, the reality might be much different. They clearly give points costs for some things that don't "add up" when viewed against other things - either in the same book - or other books (harder to compare, but still viable in extreme cases - Ring of Hotek - etc).

The many-armed monstrosity one is a key example of this. 50-pts for +2 attacks is fundamentally "Screwy" - when - as Gyges points out - most books have 5 or 10-pts getting you an "extra hand weapon" - for +1 attack on a Lord/Hero character.

So, even if you assumed 10-pts was a reasonable cost for +1 additional attack, does it really make sense that the "Second" +1 should cost 40-MORE points ???

Not really. But that's the logic that GW seems to have employed when costing Many-Armed Monstrosity.

When you consider that, maybe the cost for Torment Blade is "not" that outrageous ? If we agree the effect itself is "sort of lame/weak" - then at the very most the Daemon taking it should probably only pay 10 or 15 points total for the +1 Attack and Lame Special Effect, combined.

If we say "no, it's that combo, but only costs 5-pts" - YES - the Daemons are probably getting a bit of a points break, but....that doesn't mean it was "unintentional by GW" - it might just be another example of their weird points-assignment.

This is further supported when you look at the Daemon Princes and their ridiculous Cost-for-what-they-can-do. In other words, if we believe GW always puts Points in proper proportion for Items/Effects/Monsters/etc - then the very existence of the Daemon Princes (being so crappy) in the book should make us wonder how accurate that belief is.

Well, a Sword of Battle generally costs about 25pts and gives +1A. On that basis Many Armed Monstrosity makes perfect sense.

Alternately an Extra Hand Weapon costs ~3pts for a hero or ~6pts for a lord.

Alternately think of the difference in cost between a Great Weapon (again ~3-6pts) and a Sword of Power (40pts, +2 Strength).

Why the difference? I suppose one reason is that the Sword of Battle keeps a hand free for a shield or enchanted shield. Another difference is that a normal hero doesn't have magic attacks and a hero with a sword of battle does. I've seen plenty of people take a Biting Blade or something equally cheap just so they can attack Ethereal targets or ignore Ward Saves on Forest Spirits.

A Daemon isn't really giving up a free hand as there isn't anything else they can do with their hands, but they're not gaining magical attacks either. Another way to think about it is an Empire Hero who takes an extra hand weapon is giving up a great weapon or a shield, while a Daemon isn't giving up any options.

Which price is sensible? Who knows, GW's pricing just might not make much sense. A Great Weapon and a Sword of Power probably shouldn't have a 1000% difference in price. A Sword of Power is better, but more than 10 times better?

Ultimately the best measure is whether or not something is under or over priced is if people actually take it. If Torment Blade gave +1A for 5pts, I can't imagine anyone not taking it on a Slaanesh Herald (they might not take a Slaanesh Herald, but that is a different sort of balance issue, the gifts need to be balanced against each other as well as the Heralds against each other). Without the +1A, 5pts is a more of an actual decision. Taken with a leadership bomb army its pretty solid, but that's about it.